TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Airbus and Climate Change

91 点作者 timlod超过 2 年前

14 条评论

dkarl超过 2 年前
&gt; And it has been quite surprising to discover that, behind the curtains, Airbus employees are much less corporate than we might think.<p>It&#x27;s depressing that this is surprising, and even more depressing that it gives him optimism about the behavior of Airbus as a whole. The behavior of corporations doesn&#x27;t reflect the morality of the people in them. The myth that it does is consistently used to argue against the necessity of regulations and enforcement. &quot;Hey, look at all these people working in the ____ industry, they aren&#x27;t evil. Bad behavior is the exception, a rare perfect storm when a handful of morally bankrupt individuals randomly converge.&quot; No, indifference to good and evil is the rule, regardless of the morality of the individuals involved. Destructive strategies that result in profit will be pursued to the hilt, and individuals inside a corporation are helpless to prevent this without laws and aggressive enforcement to support them.
mcculley超过 2 年前
While I am completely convinced that humans are changing the climate, I am not convinced that air travel is the big contributor claimed by many. We are only now getting satellite evidence of the amount of methane venting being done industrially, which seems to be a bigger contributor per unit of mass emitted.<p>I live in the U.S., which has many big automobiles transporting just one person. They are a much bigger emitter of carbon per person per unit of distance traveled. I don’t see why we should be discouraging commercial air travel while allowing individual automobiles to emit so much.<p>Those of you who are against air travel for climate reasons, can you share a source that has convinced you that it is a real problem?
评论 #33683036 未加载
评论 #33684117 未加载
评论 #33683162 未加载
评论 #33683027 未加载
评论 #33683305 未加载
评论 #33683525 未加载
评论 #33683057 未加载
评论 #33682990 未加载
评论 #33682931 未加载
评论 #33683062 未加载
评论 #33684934 未加载
评论 #33683111 未加载
评论 #33683065 未加载
评论 #33685702 未加载
评论 #33684572 未加载
评论 #33683881 未加载
评论 #33683797 未加载
评论 #33683301 未加载
kelseyfrog超过 2 年前
If you don&#x27;t want to navigate a link to understand what rate 70 means, it refers to a A320 Family production rate of 70 aircraft per month by Q1 2024. Up from 45 aircraft per month in Q4 2021.
评论 #33683206 未加载
goethes_kind超过 2 年前
I find this sort of discussion a bit too shallow and simple minded. What is Airbus supposed to do exactly? The author sort of implies that Airbus is somehow refusing to adapt or something. But this is just not a good representation of reality. There are only two options to reduce carbon from aviation: 1. don&#x27;t fly, 2. use synthetic fuels. The use of synthetic fuels is not really up to Airbus. They are not in the fuel business and they do not even build their own engines. So it&#x27;s really not up to them at all as far as I can see.
评论 #33684770 未加载
cowpig超过 2 年前
I find myself oscillating between bargaining, depression, and acceptance on this topic.<p>Something will happen in the world, like Bolsonaro losing his election and Lula making some promises, and I will gain hope. Then I&#x27;ll look at the IPCC again and feel depressed. Then I&#x27;ll make some commitment to change my life habits in some way that&#x27;s a bit greener and accept that I can&#x27;t do much more.<p>But there&#x27;s still some cognitive dissonance when I reach acceptance. I don&#x27;t really accept it deep down. I live in fear, especially fear for my kids&#x27; generation.
评论 #33682935 未加载
评论 #33682874 未加载
评论 #33684576 未加载
martythemaniak超过 2 年前
One of the biggest mental blocks people have in regards to climate change, is not being able to separate carbon emissions from general environmental angst. In short there&#x27;s nothing stopping us from converting our civilization to being carbon neutral, but our very existence will always have some environmental impact there is no getting past that.<p>Aviation in particular will be carbon neutral either through synthetic hydrocarbon fuel (Prometheus Terraform), new hydrogen engines, or a network of shorter hop flights with battery powered aircraft (Eviation). In fact it may turn out to be one of the easier industries convert to carbon neutral. If you&#x27;re really worried, you can work on one of these. If you don&#x27;t have the skills or the time there&#x27;s always politics, since you approaches like this will face regulatory and political hurdles that are at least as big as the technical hurdles.
joak超过 2 年前
Flying less or more generally consuming less is not going to solve the climate crisis. We need to go to net zero emissions and then to net negative emission, we need to capture the excess of GHGs to go back to a level where warming stops.<p>If we divide, let&#x27;s say, by 10 the emissions, we are still emitting too much.<p>The only solution is too eliminate completely the use of fossil fuels. For flying this means zero emissions planes (electric, hydrogen, ...) and&#x2F;or synthetic fuels.<p>Synthetic fuels is probably the fastest path to net zero emissions: no need of new technology, no need even to build new airplanes.<p>Synthetic fuels is quite easy, if electricity is cheap enough synthetic kerosene will be cheaper than classic kerosene. Luckily, thanks to renewables, electricity is becoming exponentially cheaper.<p>Several companies are on the path of producing synthetic fuels cheaper than fossil ones. One example in mind: terraform industries in Pasadena.
pjerem超过 2 年前
Airbus have always been a beloved company in Europe. It’s the company we are proud of. It’s the demonstration of the European countries working together. I’m not trying to get romantic, it’s a big company with a lot of issues of course. But it’s a symbol. It’s a company you are proud to say you work for.<p>And I truly hope they will be smart enough to transition or to to help in the energetic transition because if they don’t, they’ll die. And it would be a shame when you are employing so much good engineers.<p>But I’m not sure they will.
gardenfelder超过 2 年前
I&#x27;m reading these comments and I&#x27;m remembering Ted Nelson&#x27;s famous quote:<p>&quot;Everything is intertwingled&quot;<p>google it.<p>The point being that everything is connected, meaning: (In my view) trying to argue distinct components in some massively connected universe may not be all that helpful.<p>It&#x27;s true that reductionism gets us some grand theories, but, what are the ways we could structure vastly more holistic conversations on these matters?
11235813213455超过 2 年前
I have taken a plane less than 10 times in my whole life (I&#x27;m 35) and that&#x27;ll stay like that for the rest, I already declined travels for work. My CO2 impact is around 400kg&#x2F;year, so just 2 flights would double it. The average person CO2 impact in my country is around 9tonnes&#x2F;year
评论 #33683656 未加载
Kukumber超过 2 年前
This article is very suspicious considering aviation&#x27;s future is looking very bright with Airbus, specially in the UK [1], supposed country of the author<p>Don&#x27;t fall for the FUD, it&#x27;s like EVs&#x2F;FuelCell [2]<p>[1] - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cnbc.com&#x2F;2022&#x2F;05&#x2F;27&#x2F;airbus-sets-up-uk-facility-to-focus-on-hydrogen-tech-for-aircraft.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cnbc.com&#x2F;2022&#x2F;05&#x2F;27&#x2F;airbus-sets-up-uk-facility-t...</a><p>[2] - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=2WeoeJyJmN4&amp;t=455s" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=2WeoeJyJmN4&amp;t=455s</a>
zokier超过 2 年前
I&#x27;m kinda confused why the rate 70 is negative thing. They are an aircraft company, obviously they are going to try to sell as many aircraft as possible? What else are they going to do? Having a &quot;green aircraft program&quot; is all nice and dandy, but you need money to do so and money comes from sales.
评论 #33684267 未加载
评论 #33683685 未加载
renewiltord超过 2 年前
We&#x27;re going to out-tech this disaster, or we&#x27;re going to lose a few hundred million. This is not an existential risk. I reckon we&#x27;ll be fine.<p>We might even arrive at novel regulatory technology involving carbon provenance. We shall see.
gsatic超过 2 年前
Cant tell what level of the hierarchy this is coming from.<p>Coming out of the chaos of Brexit and Covid and now with Ukraine, I am not surprised. Seems to be the mood in most large corps in the EU.